Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Board member seeks to pause ITC resolution, cites Brown Act concerns; motion fails for lack of second
Summary
A board member raised procedural concerns about an ITC resolution, saying the board did not deliberate on the final text and that the process may have violated the Brown Act; the motion to table the resolution failed for lack of a second and staff said the resolution will go to City Council in June.
Board member Eloise said she was uncomfortable with how a recent ITC resolution was handled and raised procedural concerns she said amounted to a Brown Act issue. "I really didn't feel comfortable about that whole process of arriving at the resolution because I didn't feel like it was open and transparent and that there wasn't deliberation with the whole board," Eloise said.
Eloise asked that the board rescind or pause the resolution and table sending it to the City Council until members could verify that the item had been discussed by the full board. She said she had reviewed prior minutes and found no record of full-board deliberation on the final language. "The burden of proof is on you," she told other members, asking for evidence of deliberation.
Other board members disagreed with Eloise's characterization and said the resolution had been rewritten and discussed; one member said a subcommittee had returned a recommendation to the board and the rewritten version was discussed before the vote. The board took a motion to table the issue, but there was no second, and the motion did not carry. The chair stated that the decision stood and that the resolution would be presented to the City Council in June.
No formal action to rescind or pause the resolution was recorded; members suggested checking the minutes and returning the item to a future meeting if necessary.
